Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-11-Speech-2-114"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-02-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030211.5.2-114"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-02-11-Speech-2-1152
lpv:speaker	lp:Luís Queiró2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Partido Popular (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; PETI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South America and MERCOSUR (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; UEN (2000-09-21--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". We are aware that studying this report appeared at the outset to be a difficult exercise, basically due not only to the issue of the categories of person that should be included in the definition of ‘family member’ – or of ‘beneficiary’, in addition to the EU citizen, the definition of the right to move to and particularly to reside in the European Union – but also to the problems inherent in defining the conditions that EU citizens must fulfil in order to benefit from this right. The fact is that the solutions adopted in these nuclear definitions both in the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs and in plenary, have all had the majority support of the parliamentary left. In fact, with regard to the definition of the term ‘family’, most of the solutions were adopted in a sense that does not match the values that I hold dear, especially Amendment No 53: the ‘spouse’, regardless of their sex, the ‘unmarried partner’ and/or ‘person with whom they live’, regardless of their sex, ‘in a de facto union’, ‘with whom the applicant has a durable relationship’ and ‘registered’ under the terms of the relevant national legislation, the ‘partner’ and/or ‘person with whom they live’ from third countries or without a residence permit and lastly, direct descendents and direct relatives in the ascendant line and those of the spouse or registered partner with whom they live. My position is not rooted in any type of ideological or religious fundamentalism. I am not judging, and nor is it my place to judge anyone’s rights on the grounds of their sexual or any other kind of orientation. I see no reason why the EU should promote legal definitions of the family that are far removed not only from national legislation, making it difficult to transpose them, but also from traditional values that have always been commonly accepted. Apart from anything, such definitions will encourage all sorts of abuses by those who attempt illegally to move to the EU and settle. Hence my vote against."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph